Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    Nice fantasy. The reality is that the Company thinks of it as a marketing mall with rides.
    Yes. Your fantasy is you think there is another argument.
    I wasn't far off. A theater sells overpriced popcorn.

  2. #32

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ghetto Grove
    Posts
    948

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Broadway Guru View Post
    I have different standards, which is why I haven't been to the park in a couple years now and can't seem to find a reason to go.
    Then why Bother? is it only to exhibit a pretentious set of Standards?

    I understand completely what you're saying, but c'mon you would have written off Disneyland Resort Threads if that were the case ages ago...

    but for me, DL still invokes the nostalgia of childhood and still has original attractions...that will never cease to exist because its the only thing that has been consistent in the last 20 years for me, it doesn't make the park entirely worthless.

    Synergy in its 21st century form has ruined what we all remember, but we cant petition it or rally cry for change...so I just leave it be...
    Last edited by hyperskreem; 04-13-2011 at 08:19 PM.

  3. #33

    • Future Imagineer
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Torrance, CA
    Posts
    1,154

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    To me it's just their way of instant recognition of what the brand is. Same way Universal marketed Halloween Horror Nights last year they didn't say anything except Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, SAW, and House of 1000 Corpses. Because people know what to expect when they here those names. And fans of the film, who aren't rabid Theme Park fans like us, would go to the park to live the film. Which gives them a new customer who may now like the park because he saw it and come back again. He would probably even buy a Cars Land shirt to show that he went. And than people see his shirt he wears and they might even go to experience it themselves. That is just a vagueish theory of what the suits might think could happen with Bran Recognition. I am not sure if this is completely true but this is the way I see it.

  4. #34

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Broadway Guru View Post
    Oh, but movie sales are the issue and have been for years. Eisner had a synergistic vision for the Disney company in which all parts of the company, including the parks, must "pull their weight" in promoting other company product. Thus, attractions which are not character based must become so, either by being made into movies or by having characters retconned into them (or, in the case of Pirates, both).
    I think you're conflating two very different concepts as if they are one and the same, but they are not.

    Synergy by definition means a piece of intellectual property can be spread to many different media and sold as products within, such as a television show or movie can be marketed in books, music, DVDs, cable, and merchandise. Thus Synergy means it is greater than its individual parts. A property becomes a franchise.

    The company product is no longer the "movie", it is the intellectual property (the characters, the story, the plot, the spinoffs). A Disneyland ride is a new form of the intellectual property. It serves the theme parks in getting people to buy admission tickets and then buy the theme park ride merchandise and the associated food, character meet and greets, and other promotion available to promote the characters.

    Therefore, this "pulling their weight" is about how this intellectual property (IP) can serve the theme park market. It isn't hard to know if the IP is doing is job. Disney expect measurable increase in park attendance and sales within the parks. I expect 2012 to be a big year to determine if their investment in DCA is a hit or miss.

  5. #35

    • Senior Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    8,890

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    I wasn't far off. A theater sells overpriced popcorn.
    You're farther than the proverbial hawk from the moon. Walt and Van France were talking about theater.

    You're talking about a movie theater chain: its purpose, its philosophy, its values.


    Quote Originally Posted by StevenW View Post
    Marketing.... Another evil word.. Sigh...
    What's ironic is how the reality of what Disneyland is, is so quickly dodged by those who champion its core business model.

    Disneyland under Eisner and Iger is a marketing mall with rides, funded and operated for the purpose of synergistically marketing Disney Corporate franchise brands, aimed at specific youth demographics.

    Pre-1985, Disneyland was the brand.
    "With the acquisition of Marvel and now of Lucasfilm,
    Disney may have finally found the grail. You don't need
    imagination or art. All you need is a brand."

    - Neil Gabler


  6. #36

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Wiggins View Post
    You're farther than the proverbial hawk from the moon. Walt and Van France were talking about theater.

    You're talking about a movie theater chain: its purpose, its philosophy, its values.
    Walt talked about it THEN.

    I'm talking about it NOW. Let's talk about a theater's values. Getting people into the seats so they can sell overpriced popcorn.

    I think you need to explain yourself in how I'm not getting your point, whatever that is.

    What's ironic is how the reality of what Disneyland is, is so quickly dodged by those who champion its core business model.

    Disneyland under Eisner and Iger is a marketing mall with rides, funded and operated for the purpose of synergistically marketing Disney Corporate franchise brands, aimed at specific youth demographics.

    Pre-1985, Disneyland was the brand.
    Which I didn't dispute (see above).

  7. #37

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,605

    Re: Why Original Attractions Are Good For Business

    Quote Originally Posted by DLRaddict View Post
    Because people know what to expect when they here those names. And fans of the film, who aren't rabid Theme Park fans like us, would go to the park to live the film.
    This is exactly the argument I was talking about in my OP. Back in the 50's and 60's, people who were not rabid theme park fans were somehow enticed to visit Disneyland to see new, original attractions, and those attractions became HUGE POPULAR HITS in their own right. How was this accomplished? Now, maybe it wouldn't be accomplished the same way now as it was then, but I wouldn't say that its impossible. C'mon, marketing department! Don't be afraid to be creative!

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldDisney
    Or is because the ride has automatic name recognition, they think it will be easier to just market the ride and make it popular? Again, sure, that's a no brainer, but JUST as many non-films become just as popular, regardless what the storyline or character is there. People just respond to a good theme park ride at the end of the day and word of mouth carries it. And because its just so easy to advertise and to get word out with the internet and sites like this, its not like there is some big $100 million dollar ride with hardly any attention sitting alone in these parks because people dont know the storylines. Every major attraction, brand and non-brand becomes just as popular as the OP proves. So what is it? Does it really does drive sales, easy to just market the ride or both? And if sales is not a factor, they have more than enough popular attractions without a movie attached to know its the content FIRST, known brand second that matters anyway. If that was the case, Pooh would have the 90 min waits and Splash Mountain would get 5-10 mins all year.
    Thank you, WorldDisney! Exactly!

    I freely admit that I want to go to Universal IoA specifically to see The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. I'm not asking that every new attraction be original, or even that the majority of them would be. Just some, every once in a while, to keep the idea that Disneyland is its own thing, and to help establish that DCA is its own thng.

    With regards to Steven W's theater metaphor, here's my version: DCA was built like a multiplex with only 3 theaters, but 10 concession stands, on the theory that it would sell more popcorn that way. It didn't. They forgot that the movie is what the people come to see, not the popcorn. Today's model is a little more balanced, but every theater is showing Popcorn! The Movie, because they think if it isn't shoved in people's face the entire time, they won't want to buy any. I have no problem with the theater luring people in to sell overpriced popcorn. But even Hollywood, paranoid and terrified of new ideas as they are, comes out with a few movies a year that aren't direct remakes.

    I like Broadway Guru's quote:

    Quote Originally Posted by Broadway Guru
    I'd be happy w/ that kind of a range. In Walt's time, he had attractions based on successful movies, flops, inspired by but not directly based on a movie, based on no movie at all, based on classic literature w/ no movie tie in, and based on history. That kind of creative variety made DL what it was 30 years ago. No more. In the last 15 years, this has been narrowed to two choices: based on recently released movie or based on wildly successful movie from a few years back.
    (Even though, unlike Guru, Disneyland still holds enough appeal to me that I haven't decided to stop visiting.)


    Quote Originally Posted by DLRAddict
    On to the OP. Anything for DCA Phase One will be based on movies because that is what will draw people in, saying there is a Cars ride is a way of getting fans of the film to go to the parks. Anything beyond 2012 we could be seeing some original rides whether E-Ticket or not. But if they are E ticket rides they will need to offer something guests have never seen before.
    I hope that will be the case.


    Quote Originally Posted by Steven W
    Hmmm. Haven't we been through this before? SuperStar Limo and Golden Dreams. These were original attractions for DCA. Certainly, the detail wasn't there, but the originality was a flop. That's why they went back to fix DCA with movie based ideas that were from actual HITS like the Pixar movies.
    Who said originality is what made them flop? They flopped because nobody comes to a theme park to be yelled at by a creepy puppet agent, or to see a documentary on the state they're already in. Of course, originality doesn't guarentee quality or popularity. But it doesn't exclude it, either.

    Now, you have to tell me what exactly is DCA and what its true identity.
    No, I don't. The Imagineers do .

    It would be nice to have a boat ride with a storyline about Walt's California. It should be exciting with original music and such. However, I have great difficulty in figuring out how it would be done TODAY.
    So because you don't see how one idea you came up with would be done today, all potential original attractions are impossible?

    The public's interest in nostalgia have decreased. People want something new and contemporary.
    Nostalgia certainly isn't the same as it was back in the 50's, but I wouldn't say that it's dead. Why are people lining up for these pirate movies that take place in THE PAST?

    I do agree that Pixar could be the correct creative team to create an original attraction. However, again, why would it preclude the release of a movie? It is almost complementary. In fact, I think the idea might be so good that they had to first release the movie and then build the attraction, thus defeating your idea that the ride is original and non-movie based.
    Not everything that makes a good attraction makes a good movie, and vice versa. And again, I think it's good for the DLR to have things that can only be experienced there. It keeps it feeling special. It keeps the park's identity in tact, or helps establish an identity for a new park. And that, I say, is good for business.

    Now, on to the "who cares if it's original or not, it's only the execution that counts" argument. Picture that you're a Disney Imagineer. You're one of the top people in the world in your line of work. If you worked for virtually any division of the company - Pixar, Walt Disney Animation Studios, Walt Disney Pictures live action - anywhere else - original ideas would be a possibility. But just because you design theme parks, they aren't. Why?
    Last edited by animagusurreal; 04-14-2011 at 04:46 PM.
    "Happy Working Song" parody for DCA remodel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-TYESfNTP8&feature=plcp

    Retro Rant Review of "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" (comedy review of direct-to-video
    Disney sequel):
    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/user/animagus.../1/q1j7FU8QXu0
    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/user/animagus.../0/sasNTMDRBLU

    Retro Rant Review of "Home on the Range" (comedy review of Disney movie):
    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7mC-...feature=relmfu
    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoUie...feature=relmfu
    Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3Vea...feature=relmfu


    Visit my site: http://www.vividgroovy.com



    Pratfall the albatross superheroine visits the Carthay Circle Theatre.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. [Chat] WHY is TDL being cared for more then The ORIGINAL DLR?
    By Fish_in_water in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-28-2010, 01:59 AM
  2. [Chat] Flying into Ontario - good for Newport Beach. So why is Disney supporting this?
    By DisneyIPresume in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-05-2009, 02:13 PM
  3. Epcot attractions that are gone for GOOD!
    By horizonsfan92 in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-28-2006, 08:13 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •